Patrick Hoffmann/WENN
Much to the dismay of Trekkers everywhere, Roberto Orci will be making his directorial debut with Star Trek 3. According to Variety, Orci, who wrote and produced the first two installments of the franchise with his business partner Alex Kurtzman, has been the frontrunner for some time now, although the names of the other directors being considered haven't been revealed. Orci's name has been in contention for the job since he and Kurtzman announced their split, so the news doesn't come as too much of a surprise. He's also been working on the script with J.D. Payne and Patrick McKay, while J.J. Abrams will serve as producer.
Star Trek is just the latest franchise to take a chance on a new director, as studios have recently made it a habit of picking independent or first-timer directors to helm blockbusters like The Amazing Spider Man 2 or Godzilla. In fact, many of the most expensive films ever made were headed by directors making their feature film debut. Considering Star Trek Into Darkness had a budget of $185 million, it seems as if Orci will soon join the ranks of first-time directors taking on a big-budget franchise. In honor of the major challenge that Orci has ahead of him, we've rounded up the six most expensive directorial debuts and how those directors handled them. That way, Trekkies can try and manage their expectations.
Robert Stromberg, Maleficent - $180 millionWalt Disney Studios
Though fantasy fixtures like David Yates and Tim Burton were rumored to helm the Disney prequel, the studio instead handed the reins to Stromberg, an Oscar-winning production designer. We'll have to wait until the film's May 30 release in order to see how well he handled the material, but from the trailers it's clear that the director's previous experience has resulted in visually stunning movie.
Bob Peterson, Up - $175 millionWalt Disney Co. via Everett Collection
Before he took the helm for Up, Peterson was best known for providing voices for some of Pixar's most icoinc characters. However, his directorial debut blew his other projects away, earning five Academy Award nominations — including Best Picture, making it only the second animated film to be nominated in that category — a win for Best Animated Feature, and opening the Cannes Film Festival. Oh, and it grossed over $700 million at the box office.
Carl Erik Rinsch, 47 Ronin - $175 millionUniversal Pictures via Everett Collection
Loosely based on the fictional account of 47 samurai who avenged their master's death, the big budget film was entrusted to Rinsch by Universal, despite his lack of feature film experience. Unfortunately for the studio, it wasn't a gamble that paid off, as the film's release date was pushed back several times, it received largely negative reviews and it failed to break even at the box office. Hopefully Paramount won't find themselves in the same situation with Star Trek.
Rupert Sanders, Snow White and the Huntsman - $170 millionUniversal Pictures via Everett Collection
Prior to Snow White and the Hunstman, Sanders had primarily directed commercials, although that didn't stop Universal from trusting him with this fantasy epic. The resulting film did well at the box office even though it received mostly mixed reviews, and was rumored to be getting a sequel, with Sanders taking the helm once again. However, both films were overshadowed by the tabloid frenzy that resulted from Sanders' affair with his leading lady, Kristen Stewart, so it doesn't look like that will be happening any time soon.
Joseph Kosinski, Tron: Legacy - $170 million Walt Disney Studios via Everett Collection
When Disney decided to make a sequel to Tron almost thirty years after the first film was released, they turned to Kosinski, who had become known for his work with computer generated effects in the commercials he directed. Though Tron: Legacy received mixed reviews, choosing Kosinski turned out to be a smart choice in the long run, as the film grossed over $400 million during its run in theaters.
Rich Moore, Wreck-It Ralph - $165 million Walt Disney Studios via Everett Collection
Before taking on Wreck-It Ralph, Moore made his name directing episodes of The Simpsons and Futurama, which made him a perfect fit for the goofy, self-referential film. It was a major hit for Disney, grossing over $400 million at the box office, winning the Annie Award for Best Animated Feature and earning an Oscar nomination for Best Animated Picture. Unfortunately, it lost the award to Brave, because nobody loves a Pixar movie more than the Academy.
Follow @hollywood_com
//
Follow @julesemm
//

DreamWorks
For the bulk of every Rocky and Bullwinkle episode, moose and squirrel would engage in high concept escapades that satirized geopolitics, contemporary cinema, and the very fabrics of the human condition. With all of that to work with, there's no excuse for why the pair and their Soviet nemeses haven't gotten a decent movie adaptation. But the ingenious Mr. Peabody and his faithful boy Sherman are another story, intercut between Rocky and Bullwinkle segments to teach kids brief history lessons and toss in a nearly lethal dose of puns. Their stories and relationship were much simpler, which means that bringing their shtick to the big screen would entail a lot more invention — always risky when you're dealing with precious material.
For the most part, Mr. Peabody &amp; Sherman handles the regeneration of its heroes aptly, allowing for emotionally substance in their unique father-son relationship and all the difficulties inherent therein. The story is no subtle metaphor for the difficulties surrounding gay adoption, with society decreeing that a dog, no matter how hyper-intelligent, cannot be a suitable father. The central plot has Peabody hosting a party for a disapproving child services agent and the parents of a young girl with whom 7-year-old Sherman had a schoolyard spat, all in order to prove himself a suitable dad. Of course, the WABAC comes into play when the tots take it for a spin, forcing Peabody to rush to their rescue.
Getting down to personals, we also see the left brain-heavy Peabody struggle with being father Sherman deserves. The bulk of the emotional marks are hit as we learn just how much Peabody cares for Sherman, and just how hard it has been to accept that his only family is growing up and changing.
DreamWorks
But more successful than the new is the film's handling of the old — the material that Peabody and Sherman purists will adore. They travel back in time via the WABAC Machine to Ancient Egypt, the Renaissance, and the Trojan War, and 18th Century France, explaining the cultural backdrop and historical significance of the settings and characters they happen upon, all with that irreverent (but no longer racist) flare that the old cartoons enjoyed. And oh... the puns.
Mr. Peabody &amp; Sherman is a f**king treasure trove of some of the most amazingly bad puns in recent cinema. This effort alone will leave you in awe.
The film does unravel in its final act, bringing the science-fiction of time travel a little too close to the forefront and dropping the ball on a good deal of its emotional groundwork. What seemed to be substantial building blocks do not pay off in the way we might, as scholars of animated family cinema, have anticipated, leaving the movie with an unfinished feeling.
But all in all, it's a bright, compassionate, reasonably educational, and occasionally funny if not altogether worthy tribute to an old favorite. And since we don't have our own WABAC machine to return to a time of regularly scheduled Peabody and Sherman cartoons, this will do okay for now.
If nothing else, it's worth your time for the puns.
3/5
Follow @Michael Arbeiter
//
| Follow @Hollywood_com
//

Columbia Pictures via Everett Collection
It didn't hit me until Sarah Holcomb's topless scene that I was probably too young to be watching Caddyshack. And the reason it didn't hit me is because it wasn't like the other grown-up movies I would routinely dismiss after catching only quick glimpses on our living room television — this one was funny. At eight years old, I found something very special in the VHS copy of Harold Ramis' directorial debut which had come into my possession that evening in the mid '90s gratis of either my Saturday Night Live-loving father, or golf-obsessed uncle. It wasn't even the first time I had seen Caddyshack — I had at least caught most of it in parts — but it was this particular nighttime viewing that would solidify my lifelong favor of the cacophony at Bushwood. It was the first time a real movie made me laugh.
I would laugh at the red-faced exasperation of Ted Knight, who I knew from Mary Tyler Moore Show reruns (I had taken more quickly to adult sitcoms than movies, either because they were more conducive to my youthful attention span or because laugh tracks gave me helpful hints as to where the comedy was). I would laugh at the zany bravado of Rodney Dangerfield, who I knew primarily via impersonations by cartoon characters. But most of all, I cherished every second we spent with Bill Murray, slurring dopily out of the side of his mouth as he harassed the country club caddies and sought the pelt of a charmingly pesky gopher. I had no idea that adults could revel in this kind of silliness — these people were acting more like cartoons than human beings. And I loved it.
Warner Bros. via Everett Collection
Obviously, I didn't get most of the jokes. I adored Chevy Chase's deadpan swagger and rhythm, but a good deal of his dialogue flew over my head. Dangerfield's benign sexual cracks were gibberish to me. And as for the plot? To its credit or detriment (you decide), the film plays more like a series of tenuously connected hijinks than a coherent narrative. So it didn't really seem to matter that Danny Noonan's quest for a college scholarship skirted my eight-year-old attention. I was far too giddy over Al Czervik's cockeyed brass and Carl Spackler's maniacal mutterings to worry that I might be missing something carrying through. Again, it wasn't until stumbling upon a sex scene that it dawned on me that this might be considered entertainment for adults. How could I have missed so much? There was too much funny to fit anything else in!
In the 18 years since, I have watched Caddyshack more times than I can say, picking up on new layers of comedy with every revisit. In middle school, I upped the ante on my appreciation for the comic value in Judge Smails' perpetually ruffled feathers. In high school, Ty Webb's playful linguistics won my nerdy heart. And in college, I returned again to my love of that big-dreaming assistant greenskeeper, trading impressions with my roommate and fellow fan of all things Bill Murray. As my two decades wading back and forth among these performances have helped me realize, the movie is a menagerie of disparate types of comedy. Deadpan, slapstick, blue, highbrow, naturalistic, wacky, farcical, surreal. And somehow, all of it lands. One movie manages to deliver a winning satirical send-up of the moneyed class, an ultra-memorable Jaws parody about human excrement, and an offbeat conversation about the benefits of breeding one's own hybrid species of Bluegrass.
It works because Caddyshack seems to operate by one rule only: the rule of funny. Abiding not by genre, audience, or even its own original conceit (Caddyshack was originally only about the caddies, with Chase and Dangerfield's characters playing very minor roles), Caddyshack is able to regard humor alone in its execution. The result is something unusual. No, unprecedented. Hell, really damn weird. You can't credit a movie that features a love triangle, a pregnancy scare, a super-intelligent rodent, and an extended non sequitur chapter about a bishop losing his faith after being struck by lightning during a stormy golf game with a reverence to the rules of a specific reality. But Ramis seemed to understand that it was the cooperation of these entities that made them all so damn hilarious.
Warner Bros. via Everett Collection
He understood that the buttoned-up justice of the peace was hilarious because of how humorless he was, especially when at odds with a human joke book running amok on his golf course for no ostensible reason other than boredom. Another movie might have used Smails as a brick wall opposite the wiles of the bawdy Czervik, but Ramis found some of Caddyshack's best comedy in his aluminum straight man. He offered cool, collected Ty as a way to smirk knowingly at the absurdity of the goings on at Bushwood, but jumped delightedly into that same absurdity with the mentally harangued Daffy Duck that was Carl Spackler. Still, as profoundly effective as this equation might be, Caddyshack exists beyond the confines of any formula or mathematical law. Once again, there is only one rule to which Ramis seemed to have devoted himself with Caddyshack. And luckily, he understood "funny" enough to be able to pull this off.
It's the reason why I can find the movie as funny at 25 as I did at eight — this full, non-discriminating commitment to laughter. The devotion to the idea that humor itself is a genre, that a single audience isn't limited to the margins of any specific style of comedy. Ramis showcased this in each of his movies, but in Caddyshack most impressively. Few movies like it were being made back in 1980, and even fewer are now. So beholden to traditional comic beats and story structure, the industry is not likely to find itself trusting an anarchical, id-friendly movie like the one Ramis delivered back at the dawn of the '80s. But the beauty of Caddyshack is its ability to refresh its sense of humor with every viewing — to deliver a new sheath of comedy that you weren't paying attention to last time, because you were too affixed on a separate string of gags altogether. We can go back to Caddyshack every year, every five years, or every decade, finding ourselves laughing the most at a different character each time. The one guarantee: each time, thanks to the brilliant sensibilities of Ramis, we will find ourselves laughing.
So we've got that going for us. Which is nice.
Follow @Michael Arbeiter
//
| Follow @Hollywood_com
//

Lions Gate via Everett Collection
When we last left our heroes, they had conquered all opponents in the 74th Annual Hunger Games, returned home to their newly refurbished living quarters in District 12, and fallen haplessly to the cannibalism of PTSD. And now we're back! Hitching our wagons once again to laconic Katniss Everdeen and her sweet-natured, just-for-the-camera boyfriend Peeta Mellark as they gear up for a second go at the Capitol's killing fields.
But hold your horses — there's a good hour and a half before we step back into the arena. However, the time spent with Katniss and Peeta before the announcement that they'll be competing again for the ceremonial Quarter Quell does not drag. In fact, it's got some of the film franchise's most interesting commentary about celebrity, reality television, and the media so far, well outweighing the merit of The Hunger Games' satire on the subject matter by having Katniss struggle with her responsibilities as Panem's idol. Does she abide by the command of status quo, delighting in the public's applause for her and keeping them complacently saturated with her smiles and curtsies? Or does Katniss hold three fingers high in opposition to the machine into which she has been thrown? It's a quarrel that the real Jennifer Lawrence would handle with a castigation of the media and a joke about sandwiches, or something... but her stakes are, admittedly, much lower. Harvey Weinstein isn't threatening to kill her secret boyfriend.
Through this chapter, Katniss also grapples with a more personal warfare: her devotion to Gale (despite her inability to commit to the idea of love) and her family, her complicated, moralistic affection for Peeta, her remorse over losing Rue, and her agonizing desire to flee the eye of the public and the Capitol. Oftentimes, Katniss' depression and guilty conscience transcends the bounds of sappy. Her soap opera scenes with a soot-covered Gale really push the limits, saved if only by the undeniable grace and charisma of star Lawrence at every step along the way of this film. So it's sappy, but never too sappy.
In fact, Catching Fire is a masterpiece of pushing limits as far as they'll extend before the point of diminishing returns. Director Francis Lawrence maintains an ambiance that lends to emotional investment but never imposes too much realism as to drip into territories of grit. All of Catching Fire lives in a dreamlike state, a stark contrast to Hunger Games' guttural, grimacing quality that robbed it of the life force Suzanne Collins pumped into her first novel.
Once we get to the thunderdome, our engines are effectively revved for the "fun part." Katniss, Peeta, and their array of allies and enemies traverse a nightmare course that seems perfectly suited for a videogame spin-off. At this point, we've spent just enough time with the secondary characters to grow a bit fond of them — deliberately obnoxious Finnick, jarringly provocative Johanna, offbeat geeks Beedee and Wiress — but not quite enough to dissolve the mystery surrounding any of them or their true intentions (which become more and more enigmatic as the film progresses). We only need adhere to Katniss and Peeta once tossed in the pit of doom that is the 75th Hunger Games arena, but finding real characters in the other tributes makes for a far more fun round of extreme manhunt.
But Catching Fire doesn't vie for anything particularly grand. It entertains and engages, having fun with and anchoring weight to its characters and circumstances, but stays within the expected confines of what a Hunger Games movie can be. It's a good one, but without shooting for succinctly interesting or surprising work with Katniss and her relationships or taking a stab at anything but the obvious in terms of sending up the militant tyrannical autocracy, it never even closes in on the possibility of being a great one.
3.5/5
Follow @Michael Arbeiter
//
| Follow @Hollywood_com
//

'
It’s been nearly a month since “Sacrifice,” the high-seas adventure/Dead Calm homage that saw the death of Fauxmanda. In addition to recappers like myself heaving a sigh of relief over the fact that we wouldn’t have to keep using the word Fauxmanda, it seemed like Revenge was finally back on track. The Ryan Brothers were dispatched, Conrad Grayson was once again clearly the villain, and Emily herself had a newfound laser focus on her revenge scheme. Or so we thought. “Retribution” decided to do what Revenge always seems to do when it doesn’t know how to proceed: muddy the narrative waters and add even more extraneous characters! We’re right back to square one.
The episode began with a deliberate echo of the way the series itself began: Emily narrating her Hammurabi platitudes over an image of rolling waves. Retribution, an eye for an eye, is all about restoring balance. Even if retribution risks perpetuating a cycle of violence, such an unending cycle is preferable to letting the guilty go free, and all that Old Testament stuff. Of course, she was especially gunning for blood after Amanda died in her arms. She herself said that she’d just lost “one of the only people I’ve ever loved,” which makes it all the more unfortunate that the show had been keen on turning Amanda into a rival/poseur/threat for so damn long. How deep did that love for her doppelganger (in name only) go? Emily was so affected, in fact, that she seemed to want to shoot Conrad Grayson then and there. I mean, this situation could not be more desperate: Amanda’s dead, Jack’s in the hospital, and Nolan is on the verge of giving over a WMD computer program to save his girlfriend’s father from losing another finger. What’s a revenge-meister to do?
RELATED: ‘Revenge’ Showrunner Says, ‘S*** Is About to Go Down’
On top of all that, Helen Crowley’s replacement, Mr. Trask (who you eagle-eyed readers noted last time was Mr. Guppy on Andrew Davies’ version of Bleak House) had decided to snoop around about Fake Amanda. Conrad told him she was in possession of a laptop with evidence that could incriminate all of them. So when Emily was at the Stowaway picking up Jack’s clothes she discovered the Initiative agent doing a scan of the place himself, posing as a lawman. No man with such bug eyes, thin lips, and pasty complexion could be up to any good. Shame that was pretty much the last we saw of him in this episode.
At the coroner’s, Charlotte was brought in to identify the body of her “sister.” You’d think Jennifer Jason Leigh’s Kara, who rushed to her daughter’s hospital bed when she was flung off a balcony rail, would be there too, no? I guess Revenge’s writers realized her character was such a mistake that she’s totally banished, even when this is one time that her presence would make some logical sense. Emily showed up at the coroner’s herself and saw Victoria was there as Charlotte’s escort. By now Emily and her nemesis reiterate their contempt for one other each time they’re in each other’s presence by emphatically stating each other’s names: “Emily.” “Victoria.”
RELATED: ‘Revenge’ Recap: Did This Show Just Get Good Again?
Of all the Graysons, Daniel seemed to be the only one having a crisis of conscience over Amanda’s death. First things first, he wanted to rob the Initiative of their prize by getting Nolan to delete the Carrion program. “Control-Alt-Delete, got it,” Nolan said in response. The thing is…who should he trust? Daniel probably is right that he should delete it, but Padma’s father will die if the Iniative doesn’t get their cloak-and-dagger-holding hands on it. Then again, for what apocalyptic purpose will the Initiative use Carrion? Like any geek, Nolan should realize that, despite his love for Padma, the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few or the one. No wonder he now answers the phone with, “Nolan Ross, life’s pawn.”
RELATED: ‘Revenge’ Recap: Victoria Packs Heat
So Jack was totally devastated by Amanda’s death, as was to be expected. Not certain if he was as devastated by her death as he was by Sammy’s, but that was man’s best friend, so come on. His grief burned bright for a moment, then quickly turned to a chill. Suddenly, it seemed that he needed to scratch the revenge itch against the Graysons as well. He would finish what his wife had started, and the first step to do that would be to get into Conrad’s good graces. He’d accept the mogul’s generous offer of paying his medical bills and thank him with obsequious gratitude like “I don’t know if I can ever repay you.” Conrad saw Jack’s phoniness and raised him, even allowing baby Carl into Grayson Manor. The cherry on top of Conrad’s own charlatanism was the flag pin he now wears to advance his craven political ambitions.
NEXT: Emily eulogizes Amanda…meaning she’s eulogizing herself. We’ve really gone down the Persona/Mulholland Drive female-personalities-merging rabbit hole haven’t we?
Jack decided that he wanted Emily to give Amanda’s eulogy. Which meant basically that she would have to give her own eulogy to someone else. Yes, this is majorly effed up. While Conrad made his own statement about Amanda’s death to the media, Jack began the first part of his revenge scheme against him by cracking open his late wife’s laptop. He needed that intel to use against the Graysons. The only problem was that he has zero computer skills, was never able to log in, and thus was dead in the water — not to make a pun, since his wife literally was dead in the water. He’d have to loop in Nolan. In the meantime, though, he did discover files among Amanda’s effects that showed she and Emily went way back and were even juvie buddies at Allendale. Meaning that Emily probably knew about Amanda’s vendetta against the Graysons and did nothing to discourage her from it, even though she was in terrible danger. Jack was not happy. To Emily, he was even all like, “Aw, you were worried it would ruin your perfect reputation?” Um, your wife was in juvie too, buddy. But it was an interesting glimpse. If Jack is this mad at her for concealing her past, imagine how he’ll fly off the handle when he learns she’s really Amanda. When he finds out, will he totally lose it? Or will he be so besotted with the concept of Amanda, that he’ll immediately forget about Fauxmanda, even though she’s the mother of his child, and embrace his second chance with his childhood sweetheart? Nolan, for one, discouraged Emily from revealing herself to Jack at this moment. He thought it would be like Jack losing his wife twice: once in death, another in realizing that she wasn’t who she said she was.
So Emily eulogized herself. I half expected a distraught Jack to climb on top of his wife’s coffin and ride it into her grave like Leland Palmer on Twin Peaks, but he kept it together. Victoria had a quasi-nice moment with Emily, in which she said that she was actually glad David Clarke had died so he wouldn’t be around to witness his daughter’s death.
As for Nolan, he decided to turn over the Carrion program to Padma, so she could give it to the Initiative and rescue her father. But come now. Surely that wasn’t the “real” Carrion program he gave her? Methinks Nolan has an ace up his sleeve. Perhaps a device that will allow him to expose the Initiative’s entire computer network?
Emily was also looking to throw away some crucial tech. When Aidan presented her with the revenge computer, she threw it into the sea. Sure, it had evidence on there to send Conrad and Victoria to prison, but then again she said, “My plan never had anything to do with going to prison.” Um, so what is your plan? A season and a half into this show, you can at least give us an idea of your goal right? I mean, as murky as Lost was, at least we always had a goal in mind: leaving the island. What could possibly by Emily’s endgame at this point?
So, hopefully brainstorming that endgame, Emily visited Amanda’s grave. Standing behind her was another mourner who said he couldn’t believe she was gone, that the Amanda he knew was a force of nature, that she burned his house down. Mason Treadwell? No. An African-American guy who called himself Amanda’s brother. Oh, right, foster brother! Because Charlotte’s Google search into Amanda’s past, which revealed her sister’s foster family, had to be setting up something. A shame that it’s a new character we’ve never seen before, in whom we have no investment, who will likely just be another red herring. Except that, since he knew the real Amanda at a slightly older age, he may be among the few who could actually expose Emily now. From the preview of next week’s ep, that sure seems to be the case.
Anyway, folks, do you think I’m being too hard on our favorite primetime sudser? Do you think Revenge has found its way back on track? Or was Emily right when she quoted Roger Moore and said "before setting out on revenge you first dig two graves”? Is one of those graves for this show itself?
Follow Christian Blauvelt on Twitter @Ctblauvelt
[Photo Credit: ABC]
From Our Partners:Kim Kardashian's Maternity Style: So Wrong? (Vh1)60 Celebrity Bikini Bodies: Guess Who! (Celebuzz)

Goldwyn arranges for his pal, played by Patrick Swayze, to be killed in the movie and then sets out to romance his grieving partner (Demi Moore), while being haunted by the dead man's ghost.
But he admits he had to fight for the role of Carl Bruner - because Zucker wasn't sure he had the face of a bad guy.
Reuniting with his Ghost co-star Whoopi Goldberg on her daily U.S. talk show The View, Goldwyn said, "When I got cast in Ghost, Jerry didn't want to hire me because he said I was too sympathetic and I'd never played a bad character.
"He said they (film fans) would want me to get life imprisonment, not get killed."

Robert Zemeckis is a blockbuster director at heart. Action has never been an issue for the man behind Back to the Future. When he puts aside the high concept adventures for emotional human stories — think Forrest Gump or Cast Away — he still goes big. His latest Flight continues the trend revolving the story of one man's fight with alcoholism around a terrifying plane crash. Zemeckis expertly crafts his roaring centerpiece and while he finds an agile performer in Denzel Washington the hour-and-a-half of Flight after the shocking moment can't sustain the power. The "big" works. The intimate drowns.
Washington stars as Whip Whitaker a reckless airline pilot who balances his days flying jumbo jets with picking up women snorting lines of cocaine and drinking himself to sleep. Although drunk for the flight that will change his life forever that's not the reason the plane goes down — in fact it may be the reason he thinks up his savvy landing solution in the first place. Writer John Gatins follows Whitaker into the aftermath madness: an investigation of what really happened during the flight Whitaker's battle to cap his addictions and budding relationships that if nurtured could save his life.
Zemeckis tops his own plane crash in Cast Away with the heart-pounding tailspin sequence (if you've ever been scared of flying before Flight will push into phobia territory). In the few scenes after the literal destruction Washington is able to convey an equal amount of power in the moments of mental destruction. Whitaker is obviously crushed by the events the bottle silently calling for him in every down moment. Flight strives for that level of introspection throughout eventually pairing Washington with equally distraught junkie Nicole (Kelly Reilly). Their relationship is barely fleshed out with the script time and time again resorting to obvious over-the-top depictions of substance abuse (a la Nic Cage's Leaving Las Vegas) and the bickering that follows. Washington's Whitaker hits is lowest point early sitting there until the climax of the film.
Sharing screentime with the intimate tale is the surprisingly comical attempt by the pilot's airline union buddy (Bruce Greenwood) and the company lawyer (Don Cheadle) to get Whitaker into shape. Prepping him for inquisitions looking into evidence from the wreckage and calling upon Whitaker's dealer Harling (John Goodman) to jump start their "hero" when the time is right the two men do everything they can to keep any blame being placed upon Whitaker by the National Transportation Safety Board investigators. The thread doesn't feel relevant to Whitaker's plight and in turn feels like unnecessary baggage that pads the runtime.
Everything in Fight shoots for the skies — and on purpose. The music is constantly swelling the photography glossy and unnatural and rarely do we breach Washington's wild exterior for a sense of what Whitaker's really grappling with. For Zemeckis Flight is still a spectacle film with Washington's ability to emote as the magical special effect. Instead of using it sparingly he once again goes big. Too big.
="font-style:>

It was the trickle of pee heard around the world. Cannes attendees were aghast and/or amused an infamous scene from The Paperboy that shows Nicole Kidman urinating on Zac Efron; this is apparently a great salve for jellyfish burns which were covering our Ken Doll-like protagonist. (In fact the term protagonist should be used very loosely for Efron's character Jack who is mostly acted upon than active throughout.)
Lurid! Sexy! Perverse! Trashy! Whether or not it's actually effective is overshadowed by all the hubbub that's attached itself to the movie for better or worse. In fact the movie is all of these things — but that's actually not a compliment. What could have become somethingmemorable is jaw-droppingly bad (when it's not hilarious). Director Lee Daniels uses a few different visual styles throughout from a stark black and white palette for a crime scene recreation at the beginning to a '70s porno aesthetic that oscillates between psychedelic and straight-up sweaty with an emphasis on Efron's tighty-whiteys. This only enhances the sloppiness of the script which uses lines like narrator/housekeeper/nanny Anita's (Macy Gray) "You ain't tired enough to be retired " to conjure up the down-home wisdom of the South. Despite Gray's musical talents she is not a good choice for a narrator or an actor for that matter. In a way — insofar as they're perhaps the only female characters given a chunk of screen time — her foil is Charlotte Bless Nicole Kidman's character. Anita is the mother figure who wears as we see in an early scene control-top pantyhose whereas Charlotte is all clam diggers and Barbie doll make-up. Or as Anita puts it "an oversexed Barbie doll."
The slapdash plot is that Jack's older brother Ward (Matthew McConaughey) comes back to town with his colleague Yardley (David Oyelowo) to investigate the case of a death row criminal named Hillary Van Wetter. Yardley is black and British which seems to confuse many of the people he meets in this backwoods town. Hillary (John Cusack) hidden under a mop of greasy black hair) is a slack-jawed yokel who could care less if he's going to be killed for a crime he might or might not have committed. He is way more interested in his bride-to-be Charlotte who has fallen in love with him through letters — this is her thing apparently writing letters and falling in love with inmates — and has rushed to help Ward and Yardley free her man. In the meantime we're subjected to at least one simulated sex scene that will haunt your dreams forever. Besides Hillary's shortcomings as a character that could rustle up any sort of empathy the case itself is so boring it begs the question why a respected journalist would be interested enough to pursue it.
The rest of the movie is filled with longing an attempt to place any the story in some sort of social context via class and race even more Zac Efron's underwear sexual violence alligator innards swamp people in comically ramshackle homes and a glimpse of one glistening McConaughey 'tock. Harmony Korine called and he wants his Gummo back.
It's probably tantalizing for this cast to take on "serious" "edgy" work by an Oscar-nominated director. Cusack ditched his boombox blasting "In Your Eyes" long ago and Efron's been trying to shed his squeaky clean image for so long that he finally dropped a condom on the red carpet for The Lorax so we'd know he's not smooth like a Ken doll despite how he was filmed by Daniels. On the other hand Nicole Kidman has been making interesting and varied career choices for years so it's confounding why she'd be interested in a one-dimensional character like Charlotte. McConaughey's on a roll and like the rest of the cast he's got plenty of interesting projects worth watching so this probably won't slow him down. Even Daniels is already shooting a new film The Butler as we can see from Oprah's dazzling Instagram feed. It's as if they all want to put The Paperboy behind them as soon as possible. It's hard to blame them.

While recent animated blockbusters have aimed to viewers of all ages starting with fantastical concepts and breathtaking visuals but tackling complex emotional issues along the way Ice Age: Continental Drift is crafted especially for the wee ones — and it works. Venturing back to prehistoric times once again the fourth Ice Age film paints broad strokes on the theme of familial relationships throwing in plenty of physical comedy along the way. The movie isn't that far off from one of the many Land Before Time direct-to-video sequels: not particularly innovative or necessary but harmless thrilling fun for anyone with a sense of humor. Unless they have a particular distaste for wooly mammoths the kids will love it.
Ice Age: Continental Drift continues to snowball its cartoon roster bringing back the original film's trio (Ray Romano as Manny the Mammoth Denis Leary as Diego the Sabertooth Tiger and John Leguizamo as Sid the Sloth) new faces acquired over the course of the franchise (Queen Latifah as Manny's wife Ellie) and a handful of new characters to spice things up everyone from Nicki Minaj as Manny's daughter Steffie to Wanda Sykes as Sid's wily grandma. The whole gang is living a pleasant existence as a herd with Manny's biggest problem being playing overbearing dad to the rebellious daughter. Teen mammoths they always want to go out and play by the waterfall! Whippersnappers.
The main thrust of the film comes when Scratch the Rat (whose silent comedy routines in the vein of Tex Avery/WB cartoons continue to be the series highlight) accidentally cracks the singular continent Pangea into the world we know today. Manny Diego and Sid find themselves stranded on an iceberg once again forced on a road trip journey of survival. The rest of the herd embarks to meet them giving Steffie time to realize the true meaning of friendship with help from her mole pal Louis (Josh Gad).
The ham-handed lessons may drag for those who've passed Kindergarten but Ice Age: Continental Drift is a lot of fun when the main gang crosses paths with a group of villainous pirates. (Back then monkeys rabbits and seals were hitting the high seas together pillaging via boat-shaped icebergs. Obviously.) Quickly Ice Age becomes an old school pirate adventure complete with maritime navigation buried treasure and sword fights. Gut (Peter Dinklage) an evil ape with a deadly... fingernail leads the evil-doers who pose an entertaining threat for the familiar bunch. Jennifer Lopez pops by as Gut's second-in-command Shira the White Tiger and the film's two cats have a chase scene that should rouse even the most apathetic adults. Hearing Dinklage (of Game of Thrones fame) belt out a pirate shanty may be worth the price of admission alone.
With solid action (that doesn't need the 3D addition) cartoony animation and gags out the wazoo Ice Age: Continental Drift is entertainment to enjoy with the whole family. Revelatory? Not quite. Until we get a feature length silent film of Scratch's acorn pursuit we may never see a "classic" Ice Age film but Continental Drift keeps it together long enough to tell a simple story with delightful flare that should hold attention spans of any length. Massive amounts of sugar not even required.
[Photo Credit: 20th Century Fox]